|
|
|
|
|
by stavros
28 days ago
|
|
You'd probably get better results giving the metaprompt to Fable. Information doesn't magically get created, running something through a dumb model to give to a smart model gets worse results than if you just give the smart model the prompt directly. |
|
https://gally.net/temp/20260701_Fable_synthesizer_2_with_pro...
I then gave that full prompt to Fable in Claude Code. Here is the result:
https://gally.net/temp/20260701_Fable_synthesizer_2_with_pro...
For the second, I just gave a short prompt [1] directly to Fable in Claude Code. Here is that result:
https://gally.net/temp/20260701_Fable_synthesizer_3_with_dir...
I can’t say that one is better than the other; that would take a lot more tests, and the judgments would be pretty subjective in any case.
Both were completely one-shot. Last year, when I was doing similar tests with various models, the synthesizers rarely worked right on the first shot, and I would have to do some back-and-forth to get them functioning. This time, Fable was able to open the files in Chrome itself, view and adjust the page layout, and monitor the browser events for errors. Each time it made some adjustments to the file. The only thing it wasn’t able to do was listen to and assess the sounds produced.
[1] “Write a browser-based synthesizer for me. The synthesizer should automatically create interesting polyphonic music in which the various voices play off against each other in both harmony and contrast. The controls will affect the tone, rhythmic patterns, number of voices, complexity and randomness of the melodies, and other features. The controlled features should be original—not just standard synthesizer functions—and encourage creative explorations even by naive users.”